IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 890 of 2010()
1. NALINI, D/O.RAMAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.GOPAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :10/03/2010
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------
B.A. No. 890 of 2010
------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of March, 2010
O R D E R
This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused
No.2 in Crime No.762/2009 of Vizhinjam Police Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under
Sections 420 and 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. Accused No.1 is the husband of accused No.2. The
prosecution case is that on 18.08.2008, accused Nos.1 and 2
entered into an agreement for sale with the de facto
complainant. The former agreed to sell an item of immovable
property to the de facto complainant. It is alleged that before
entering into the agreement dated 18.08.2008, the property was
already sold by accused No.1 on 31.05.2008 to a stranger. The
allegation is that by agreeing to sell the land which was already
sold to another person, the accused persons cheated the de
facto complainant.
B.A. No. 890 /2010 2
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that the petitioner is not the owner of the land at all and
therefore, the case put forward against her is not true. The
counsel also submitted that accused No.1 was arrested and he
was released on bail. The counsel pointed out that the de facto
complainant had filed a complaint before the Magistrate’s Court
and it was forwarded to the police for investigation under
Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is
submitted that only to harass the petitioner and thereby to gain
advantage, she has been made an accused.
5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the
case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of
the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner.
There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the
petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release
her on bail on her executing bond for Rs.15,000/- with two
solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:
A) The petitioner shall appear before the
investigating officer for interrogation as and
when required;
B.A. No. 890 /2010 3
B) The petitioner shall not try to influence the
prosecution witnesses or tamper with the
evidence.
C) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or
indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail.
D) In case of breach of any of the conditions
mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be
cancelled.
The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated
above.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE
ln